W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > June 2010

Re: animate-elem-46-t.svg

From: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 19:48:54 +1000
Message-Id: <ILWO3L.XMDKL3LOB7Y5@abbra.com>
To: Robert Longson <longsonr@gmail.com>
Cc: www-svg@w3.org, Daniel Holbert <dholbert@mozilla.com>, Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de
Hi Robert,

--Original Message--:
>Olaf,
>
>> And note, that the 't' in the name of the file and the doctype indicate,
>> that it is a test using the tiny profile.
>> And for this profile the value of 'font-size' has never units.
>
>We're concerned with the full profile here.
>
>http://dev.w3.org/SVG/profiles/1.1F2/test/harness/htmlSVGWeb_local/animate-elem-46-t.html
>
>1.1F2 suggests to me that this is for 1.1 full 2
>
>If not we also have...
>
>http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Test/20061213/htmlObjectHarness/full-animate-elem-46-t.html
>
>And they are all the same i.e. neither attributeType="XML" nor units.
>
>> And even for a document using the full profile, one can use units,
>> but there is no need to do it in this example - to add 'px' or
>> attributeType only  increases the file size with no effect.
>
>We're claiming that the syntax for a CSS property requires units per
>the CSS specification but the equivalent XML attribute does not per
>the SVG specification so there is a difference.

Interesting to note that the first SVG tag has:

<svg version="1.1" baseProfile="tiny" ...

So for upward compatibility reasons perhaps that is something
that has not been considered in the light of Tiny vs. Full
viewers and what to do when encountering the baseProfile (which
I assume most viewers ignore).

We clearly have some disconnect in the Tiny->Basic->Full profiles.

Alex

>Best regards
>
>Robert.
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 09:50:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:45 GMT